Author: Chris Walters

A woman in Brooklyn has accused a local grocery store of slapping a new “sell by” sticker over an expired one in order to unload some old poultry that was past its prime.

She told the The Brooklyn Paper:

I got it home [on May 12], cut off the wrapping and smelled something wrong immediately,” Viljoen told us. “The ‘sell by’ date on the label said May 16. … But the dopes left the original ‘sell by’ sticker underneath it: May 5.”

The store, a Key Foods supermarket, received poor marks in April from state inspectors, but a more recent inspection turned up nothing suspect. That may be why the store manager felt bold enough to tell the Brooklyn Paper that the customer was just a gold digger:

“People try to make money that way,” said Manager Edwin Rodriguez. “It’s absolutely not true. The inspector came in the next day, and everything’s fine.”

“Unfair fowl! Heights Key Food appears to have doctored ‘sell-by’ date on a chicken” [The Brooklyn Paper] (Thanks to Rob!)

Kiplinger has posted six travel scams you should be aware of, including “Be your own travel agent!” and “Join our travel club!” The key thing to remember is to stay away from unfamiliar travel agencies or websites, or at least do some research and try to find evidence that they’re legit before handing over your money. You should also make sure that any travel insurance you buy comes from a licensed insurer.

“Six Travel Scams to Avoid” [Kiplinger]

The next time you want to sell some old gold jewelry, you can just take it to your nearest Kmart or Sears. The retailers have announced a partnership with something called Pro Gold Network, which basically amounts to, “You can pick up a mailer and instructions at our jewelry departments.” Remember, though, that mail-in services almost always pay less than what you can get locally from a jeweler or pawn shop, or by selling to a refinery directly. Here’s what Pro Gold Network will pay so you can compare rates.

“Sears and Kmart to Offer Consumer Gold Buyback Program” [PR Newswire]

Banks and card issuers warned against the credit card reforms that went into effect a few months back, but so far it’s been a good thing for consumers, according to new delinquency numbers.

From the Associated Press:

The rate of borrowers who fell 90 days or more behind on their cards dropped to 1.11 percent for the first quarter, down from 1.32 percent in the 2009 period, according to credit reporting agency TransUnion. The delinquency rate was also down from the fourth-quarter of 2009, when it stood at 1.21 percent.

Although a lot of this good news can be attributed to consumers who are budgeting better and spending less, an executive at the credit report agency TransUnion told the AP that the reforms have also helped. Since banks can no longer raise a customer’s interest rate without warning, and since there are now limits on penalty fees, they haven’t been able to inflate balances as quickly as in the past. That in turn has led to lower minimum payments.

“Late payment drop shows impact of credit reforms” [Associated Press]

Two employees at the Sprint outlet at Cherry Creek Shopping Center, where that iPad customer had his pinkie ripped off by a criminal earlier this month, were fired for chasing down and holding a different shoplifter one day later.

The men say they were starting their breaks when they heard the Apple store security guard, who they described as being in his mid-to-late-fifties, shout, “Help! Somebody stop that guy!” They saw a young guy run past with something in a jacket, so they chased him through Macy’s and into a parking garage, where they tackled him.

Before long, on-duty Denver cops and representatives of mall security had joined the crowd. As for the guard who’d been giving chase, he worked for the same Apple Store hit by Smith the previous day. The suspect allegedly grabbed several pieces of Apple software retailing for just over $500.

Shoemaker and McGee filled out paperwork for the mall and the police, accepted heartfelt congratulations for their quick thinking, and then returned to the Sprint store. About fifteen minutes had elapsed; their break was over.

Last week Sprint HQ started asking questions, and shortly thereafter terminated their employment, citing a policy that “employees shouldn’t confront thieves” and classifying their actions as employee misconduct.

“Sprint employees fired for capturing shoplifter” [Westworld] (Thanks to Adam!)

RELATED
“Robber Steals Man’s iPad & Part Of His Fing

Fortune magazine commissioned artist Chris Ware to design a cover for their 2010 Fortune 500 issue, so he did. Unfortunately, what he delivered was a detailed, funny, and biting commentary on the current state of our economy–with banker types dancing on the top of mega-buildings that spell out “500,” a factory in Mexico churning out big box merchandise, and a “401k cemetary.” Fortune rejected it, but hasn’t provided any comment on why. Well, okay, it’s probably self-evident why they killed it, but it’s still funny.

“Fortune Rejects Chris Ware’s Cover” [Chicagoist via MetaFilter]

Do you work in a corrupt industry? The Daily Beast took a look at data gathered by Transparency International, a “global anti-corruption think tank,” and put together a list of America’s most corrupt professions. Everyone may be hating on Wall Street right now, but the worst offenders according to the criteria used are utilities. In second and third place were Wall Street and telecommunications, and media came in fifth, well before banking, insurance, or retail.

“The Most Corrupt Professions” [Daily Beast]

This “Recalled Baby Products 2009-2010” graphic from the website hugamonkey is massive, and it shows how many types of products were recalled over the past 16 months. You can use it as a reference tool to see if there’s anything in your home on the list, or to remind yourself why you’d rather have a houseplant.

“Baby Gear Recalls: Are Your Baby Products Safe?” [Hugamonkey] (Thanks to Tamar!)

Last week, the Supreme Court ruled that debt collectors can’t use a “bona fide error” defense to avoid being sued for misinterpreting the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA). In other words, if a debt collection agency makes a demand that’s in violation of the Act, it can’t say it didn’t know any better. Well, it can, but you can go right ahead and sue.

Collection agencies don’t like this ruling because they say the FDCPA contains vague language that can easily be misinterpreted. In a New York Times article about the ruling, debt collectors say websites like debtorboards.com just show people how to abuse the fuzzy language of the FDCPA to avoid paying debt they legitimately owe. But the founder of the site, former bill collector Steven Katz (who was not involved in the Supreme Court case), says he started the site after a collection agency damaged his credit history with a “bogus bill,” and that he’s only teaching consumers that they can use the law “as both a shield and a sword” against sketchy collectors.

[Highlands Today]
“Learning How to Fight the Collector” [NYTimes]

So you couldn’t pay your taxes and you opted not to file them, or an extension, at all. Don’t sit around worrying about when the IRS will catch on and come after you; file them as soon as possible, writes consumer reporter Iris Taylor, so that you can set up a repayment plan and move on with your life. The sooner you do this, the sooner you can pay them off (you can take up to 5 years to pay them), and the less you’ll end up paying in penalties and fees over the long run.

If you can pay off the bill in the next 120 days, you can call the IRS at 800-829-1040 to let them know. (You can make free electronic payments online at www.irs.gov.) If you need more time than that, fill out Form 9465 (“Installation Agreement Request”) and send that in with your tax return, along with the set-up fee–between $105 and $43, depending on your income level and payment method. And if you owe so much money that you’ll never be able to pay it off and you can prove it, send in Form 656 (“Offer in Compromise”), which will cost $150.

Finally, consider getting a loan to repay the taxes you owe. Obviously you’ll have to compare the total cost to see which method is better, but a tax manager tells Taylore that it could be “cheaper than paying penalties, interest and fees to the IRS,” and that “you’ll get more consumer protection… and you also might be able to deduct the interest that you borrow.”

“Consumer Watch: What to do if you’re a tax delinquent” [Richmond Times-Dispatch]

Last week Constantin Films got YouTube to pull almost all the Angry Hitler parody clips by using the website’s Content ID tracking system. The process is automatic, and YouTube immediately takes down a video once it’s been tagged. However, that also means you can use this system in reverse to get your clips back up, at least for as long as you’re in dispute with the copyright holder. Whether you do this or not will depend on how willing you are to risk a potential lawsuit later on.

Here’s how Content ID works. A content partner–Constantin Films in this case–uploads its content to YouTube to create a video and audio “fingerprint,” and then YouTube automatically scans user videos for matches. The copyright holder also sets up whatever rules it wants to use for taking clips offline.

After that, everything about the process is automatic. Unlike a DMCA takedown notice, which requires some human and legal involvement, the Content ID system works more or less like filters in your email account.

The good news is you can dispute any Content ID claim. If you have a clip that’s been targeted, you’ll see a notice about it on your YouTube account page. From there you can access a dispute page where you can affirm that you believe your clip falls under fair use, and the clip will immediately become public again. The copyright holder will receive notice that you’ve disputed the clip, and must then decide to leave you alone, send a DMCA takedown notice, or sue.

Brad Templeton, who created a legitimate fair use parody of Constantin Films last year using the Downfall footage, says it’s not easy to find the dispute page but that it works immediately:

YouTube does allow uploaders to file a dispute over a Content ID takedown, and I did file a dispute. Upon filing the dispute, it appears the video became immediately playable (though embedding was disabled until I turned it back on.) The uploader is not told this, however, as the YouTube status page still reports that the “dispute is still awaiting a response from Constantin Films” and that the video is “blocked worldwide.” We will see how long it takes for Constantin to respond. They don’t make the dispute form easy to find, and in fact I got no notice via e-mail that I can see to tell me of the takedown. When I visited the page logged in to YouTube, it still showed me the video even though nobody else could see it, and uploaders have to work to learn that their vids are gone.

AND NOW A WARNING. There are legal ramifications to this, which YouTube hints at and the EFF explains very clearly. If you decide to fight copyright abuse by a large company, you should make sure that you’re on the right side of the fight, that you have a sensible chance of winning a possible lawsuit, and that you’re willing to assume the financial risk. All three of those determinations probably require some serious meetings with a lawyer.

On the other hand, if you’re one of those dumb naive Internet types who make inane copyright/free speech arguments, you can check YouTube’s own “General Copyright Inquiries” page for a somewhat exasperated-sounding explanation of what types of excuses won’t work in front of a judge.

“Studio does content-ID takedown of my Hitler video about takedowns” [4Brad.com]
“Content ID and Fair Use” [YouTube Blog]
“A Guide to YouTube Removals” [Electronic Frontier Foundation]

RELATED
“Say ‘Auf Wiedersehen’ To Hitler War Room Parodies”

Sue Lowden, a senate candidate in Nevada, says if you want to combat health care costs you should consider bartering with your doctor. In an appearance on a local political talk show yesterday, she clarified her proposal:

Let’s change the system and talk about what the possibilities are. I’m telling you that this works. You know, before we all started having health care, in the olden days, our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor. They would say, “I’ll paint your house.” That’s the old days of what people would do to get health care from their doctors. Doctors are very sympathetic people. I’m not backing down from that system.

You can watch the entire segment over at the Nevada Newsmakers website.

The Economist blog notes that bartering might be a solution to financial-sector reform as well:

It would be virtually impossible to structure a chicken-based CDO; sure, you could find buyers for the breast tranche easily enough, but who would take all those necks and feet? Leverage rules become much less necessary when you can only hedge with items that actually exist; it’s hard to imagine the notional value of chicken-based hedges greatly exceeding the number of actual chickens on the planet. And all this could be accomplished without any new taxes.

At any rate, I think doctors might be more open to this idea if they can then use the chickens to pay off their student loans.

“Paying with chickens” [Economist]

Chase says this about using non-Chase ATMs: “$2 each for any non-Chase ATM withdrawal, balance inquiry or transfer. $3 per ATM withdrawal outside the U.S.” You might think that means it costs $2 in the U.S., and $3 outside. You’d be wrong.

Leila writes,

I bank with both Chase and Citibank, using Citibank for my international transactions, namely wire transfers as they have a good Global Wire transfer program. Sometimes I withdraw money from the Citibank ATM using my Chase Bank Card, to deposit money into the Citibank Account. Each time I use the Citibank ATM I am charged a 3.00 ATM fee, which is outrageous.

Upon looking at my recent Chase Banking Statements, it came to my attention that in ADDITION to the 3.00 Non Chase ATM Fee’s that I am charged directly during the withdrawal, Chase ALSO administers a 2.00 NON CHASE ATM FEE usually within 24 hours of outside ATM withdrawals, which actually makes ALL NON CHASE ATM WITHDRAWEL FEE’s $5.00 per transaction, NOT 3.00.

I called Chase to discuss this and was given the standard “We can mail you our disclosure notice”. I repeatedly asked why I am charged at the point of transaction AND after for a total of 5.00 per transaction and was given absolutely no adequate answer.

Most people seem to believe they are paying 2.00 OR 3.00 for Non Chase ATM Fee’s, but the actual fee as of April 20, 2010 is a whopping $5.00 per transaction.

Update: Several readers have suggested that the $5 is typical for international ATM access. One reader says it doesn’t cost $5 to use Chase ATMs in Mexico.

Elizabeth Brooks, a professor at Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, has some advice for people trying out makeup when they’re out shopping. As most people know, makeup can harbor bacteria and viruses, and shared testers are the worst offenders: Brooks tested hundreds of makeup counter samples for a study and found 100% of it was contaminated with things like staph, strep, and E. coli.

Here’s what she told the Los Angeles Times:

• Avoid trying jar lotions and only test ones you can squeeze or pump out.
• Clean the surface of the tester with a tissue or a tissue dipped in alcohol before trying it.
• Don’t use communal makeup brushes; the ones made from animal hair are especially hard to keep clean.
• Ask for disposable brushes or pads to apply makeup. Brooks says every counter they tested had these things behind the counter, but not on public display.
• If you insist on trying out lipstick, first debride it with a disposable applicator.
• Avoid any makeup testers that come in contact with the eyes, nose or mouth.

“Handle those store makeup testers with care” [Los Angeles Times]

Are you tired of the high fructose corn syrup battles? Today the Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, released a report that said Americans on average eat enough salt every second to kill a humpback whale kraken. I have not actually read the report, but it probably said something like that. It also said that public education campaigns have failed to reduce sodium intake, and voluntary self-regulation by the food industry hasn’t been effective.

One of the experts who authored the report explained to the Washington Post that while salt is “essential,” we ingest at least 50% more than the maximum level daily, and that this chronic overdosing leads to things like hypertension and other diseases.

According to CNN, the FDA is in the talking-to-industry-players stage of a salt-reduction program, but participation would be voluntary. The Washington Post, however, says that the FDA actually has a program set to launch later this year that will phase in legal limits for salt gradually over the next 10 years, but that it won’t discuss it because it hasn’t been formally announced.

The Salt Institute is framing the issue as a reverse health crisis in waiting, saying that restricting sodium intake would turn Americans into guinea pigs and amount to “the largest clinical trial ever carried out” without anyone’s knowledge or consent.

As for how this would affect the food industry, the Washington Post points out that there are technical challenges that have to be solved to reduce sodium in many products, because it’s not just used for taste but also as a preservative and in some cases to add “mouth feel” (in their example, sodium makes soup feel thicker).

“U.S. limits urged for salt in processed food” [CNN]
“Lawmakers urge FDA to move swiftly to limit amount of salt in foods” [Washington Post]

Earlier this month, CNN asked readers to see how far they could stretch $10. A lot of people chose unusual purchases or silly things, but there were some good ideas for tightwads too.

A man in NYC recommends buying a day-long subway pass for $8.25 and then spending the day going to free tourist sites and pay-what-you-want museums and zoos. A couple in Wisconsin spent their $10 on spinach seeds and gardening supplies, which by their estimate will eventually produce the equivalent of $1700 worth of supermarket spinach.

I would have spent mine on as many bags of discounted Easter SweeTart candies as possible, which is why I don’t have $10 but I do have a year’s worth of malic acid in my stomach right now.

“Around the world, how far can you get with $10?” [CNN]

Embassy Suites plans to launch a site next month that will let people buy sheets, comforters, pillows, coffee pots, and alarm clocks just like the ones in their hotel rooms, reports national hotel paper USA Today. A Hilton executive in charge of the Embassy brand says the company doesn’t plan to make much money off of it and that the items will be priced below retail, but I’m not sure that means you’ll find any bargains.

Hilton’s Hampton Inn chain, which already sells its products over the Internet, sold $1.7 million worth of items last year so “it’s a drop in the ocean,” Holthouser told me. “You’re not doing this to make money.”

The bigger motive for Embassy Suites is to accommodate guests who want to buy these items, he said.

“For us, it’s not a revenue stream. It’s really just about taking care of guests who quite frankly want to engage with (the brand),” he said. “At best, for us it’s a break-even proposition.”

Since the Embassy store isn’t open yet, I visited the Hampton store mentioned above and comparison shopped. These aren’t exact duplicates, but a hookless shower curtain from the hamptonhomecollection.com website is priced at $45, while a similar item is listed on the not-exactly-cheap bedbathandbeyond.com website for $40.

“Embassy Suites chain to launch retail website” [USA Today]

Last year the Department of Energy, which co-administers the Energy Star certification program with the EPA, admitted that it allows many companies to certify their goods themselves. That was somewhat worrying, but nothing like what happened earlier this year when government auditors successfully got ludicrously power-hungry designs approved for the Energy Star label. The EPA and Energy Department have responded by announcing a new, stricter certification process.

The two big changes:

• There will be no more automated approval process; all new applications must be reviewed and approved directly by EPA personnel.
• Starting 2011, every manufacturer must now provide complete testing and lab results from a certified independent lab.

One good thing is that although the program was shown to be vulnerable to fraud, companies have for the most part played fairly. A recent test of randomly chosen off-the-shelf products by the Inspector General “found that 98% of products tested fully complied with Energy Star requirements.”

“Rubber Stamping is Out: Energy Star to Close a Giant Loophole” [Treehugger]
“Federal Government Closes Energy Star Self-Certification Loophole” [ENS-Newswire.com]

RELATED
“Energy Star Program Relies On Honor System For Some Products”
“Congressional Audit Shows That EnergyStar Label May Be Meaningless”